Harrison Ford just crashed a WWII Ryan PT-22 Recruit

Here’s a great project that a filmmaker has been working on. And I think it’s especially nice that he’s a young man, not someone from a generation closer to WWII.

Thursday, February 28, 2019 6:38AM EST

A young American filmmaker is on a mission to interview every last Second World War veteran to share the stories of as many combat veterans as possible – before it is too late.

Rishi Sharma has spent the past three years documenting the lives of living Second World War veterans in the U.S., U.K. and Canada for his non-profit organization Heroes of the Second World War.

The average age of Second World War vet is now 93 years old, and the number of survivors is slowly diminishing with the passing of time.

After three years of visiting seniors’ homes to record veterans’ stories, Sharma says has filmed more than a thousand interviews.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/lifestyle/american-filmmaker-on-a-mission-to-interview-every-last-second-world-war-veteran-1.4316271

Well as I said before, Italy shot Germany in the foot that lead to Axis defeats years later and Hitler already knew this, that is why he began to reject Italian help whenever it was sent.

Look at it like this, Italy invaded Greece because Muso wanted to restore the Roman Empire hence his attack on Greece plus he just defeated two nations prior without help so in his mind, he thought Greece would be cake. Attacking Greece and being counter attacked by Greek/UK forces lead to the Wehrmacht being sent in to help the Italians which leads to Greek defeat. That lead to the pyrrhic victory that became Crete. Axis looked at paratroopers as being cancer and that lead to the Allies learning why paratroopers are useful which that bit the Axis in the A$$ in the end.

Of course as for Africa, I am sure Germany didn’t mind helping Italy because I figured Germany taking Egypt would cut of the UK navy from India as well as link Axis forces in the Middle East gaining oil reserves and possibly a secondary front against USSR. I don’t know if Germany would have the balls to attack India in this situation.

Obviously Germany had virtually no respect for the Italians. I think Rommel was the only one who spoke favorably about the Italian soldiers, hated their officers. After Italy surrendered and about half of the Italian military joined the Allies, Germany had no problem going from defending their allies to suddenly occupying a nation as well as engaging their former allies.

Part of the problem that the US Navy ran into when it went to war was that – like many military forces before or since – it had to learn some things for itself before it believed them.  The British had over two years of experience fighting the Battle of the Atlantic at that point, but the Americans didn’t feel that they needed any advice from them on the matter.  It didn’t help that Admiral Ernest J. King was an Anglophobe, in addition to having a generally abrasive personality.  (His wife reputedly once said: “Ernie is the most even-tempered man I’ve ever met.  He’s always in a foul mood.”)  As a result, the Americans made mistakes in their early ASW methods of operations which could have been avoided.  In fairness, the US Army had similar learning-curve problems in North Africa, notably at Kasserine Pass if I remember correctly.

Germany had essentially two options here. 1) Capture the city quickly, before the defenses could be built up. 2) Capture it via siege.

I don’t think that creating an urban combat situation, in which Germany attempted to capture the city street by street, would have been viable. In typical combat situations German soldiers had a 3:1 or 4:1 advantage in combat effectiveness over their Soviet counterparts. But in urban, street-to-street fighting the ratio was about 1:1. Germany could not afford anything even remotely approaching that 1:1 ratio, which is why something other than street-to-street fighting was necessary.

Von Manstein wrote that during the Barbarossa operation of '41 there had been a perfectly good opportunity to take Leningrad. But that this was wasted, allowing the Soviets to fortify it.

The other option would have been to do a better job of putting it under siege. This would have entailed tightening the cordon around the city, preventing just about anything from making it through. I think there was a case when Germany attempted exactly that. However, at the same time the Soviets were attempting to break the siege, so each side’s offensive encountered the other’s. From a tactical view there may have been more Germany could have done. But I think the real problem was strategic: the Soviet Union had too much military strength. A discussion on how to address that problem is probably outside the scope of this thread.

Guys,

––If you’re interested in this subject, I read and would recommend an EXCELLENT book on this subject,
Operation Storm" by John Geoghegan. I would give this book 5 of 5 stars possible. Check it out! Amazon even has it in “Kindle” form so you can read it on your tablet.

“Tall Paul”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kViRKNWFEk

…on a serious note, can we please as part of the Allies take responsibility for forcing Germany’s hand by taking desperate measures by “electing” this nut job?

Wow, miss a few days drinking and dancing…well watching others dance anyways…but I digress.  We no longer have an expert on the WWII food thingee/justification whatchermacallit?

It is amazing how much resources Hitler put into the defense of the British owned Channel Islands. He demanded between 10 to 25% of all Atlantic Wall material get dedicated to these Islands.

Lucky for us, Hitler was really dumb and was a terrible commander. He crippled his air force, threw away an army (6th), wasted his Kriegsmarine,he made Normandy an allied victory.
I believe that Germany would have won if they had been a competent military mind as head of state, or even if Hitler just didn’t interfere in military decision.